Download PDF
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2016; 64(05): 400-409
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1566130
Original Cardiovascular
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

A Meta-Analysis of Sutureless or Rapid-Deployment Aortic Valve Replacement

Hisato Takagi   *
1   Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Shizuoka Medical Center, Shizuoka, Japan
,
Takuya Umemoto   *
1   Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Shizuoka Medical Center, Shizuoka, Japan
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

29 June 2015

14 September 2015

Publication Date:
25 November 2015 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category

Abstract

Objective To summarize the safety of sutureless or rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement (AVR), we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of single-arm studies.

Methods MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through December 2014. Studies considered for inclusion met the following criteria: the design was a single-arm study enrolling ≥50 participants; the study population consisted of patients undergoing sutureless/rapid-deployment AVR; and main outcomes included early (in-hospital or 30-day) mortality and/or overall survival.

Results Of 250 potentially relevant articles screened initially, 11 eligible studies enrolling a total of 2,066 patients were identified and included. The Enable, Intuity, and Perceval bioprostheses were used in three, two, and six studies, respectively. Mean age of patients was 77.6 years, and 56.9% of patients were women. Mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation I and II were 10.5 and 7.4%, respectively. Aortic cross-clamp times in overall patients, patients undergoing isolated AVR, those undergoing AVR with any concomitant procedures, and those undergoing AVR with coronary artery bypass grafting were 44.7, 41.9, 56.2, and 51.3 minutes, respectively. Arithmetic mean of early mortality was 2.6%, and fixed-effects combined early mortality was 3.2% (95% confidence interval, 2.5–4.2%). Arithmetic mean of 1-year survival was 89.7%, and fixed-effects combined 1-year mortality was 10.4% (9.0–12.1%).

Conclusion Sutureless/rapid-deployment AVR is feasible and safe with approximate 3 and 10% of early and 1-year mortality, respectively. Large-size randomized controlled trials, however, are needed to determine whether sutureless/rapid-deployment AVR improves mortality compared with conventional AVR.

Keywords

meta-analysis - rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement - sutureless aortic valve replacement

* For the ALICE (All-Literature Investigation of Cardiovascular Evidence) Group.


 

  • References

  • 1 Magovern GJ, Cromie HW. Sutureless prosthetic heart valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1963; 46: 726-736
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Chandola R, Teoh K, Elhenawy A, Christakis G. Perceval sutureless valve - are sutureless valves here?. Curr Cardiol Rev 2015; 11 (3) 220-228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Borger MA, Moustafine V, Conradi L , et al. A randomized multicenter trial of minimally invasive rapid deployment versus conventional full sternotomy aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2015; 99 (1) 17-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Pollari F, Santarpino G, Dell'Aquila AM , et al. Better short-term outcome by using sutureless valves: a propensity-matched score analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 98 (2) 611-616 , discussion 616–617
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Gilmanov D, Miceli A, Ferrarini M , et al. Aortic valve replacement through right anterior minithoracotomy: can sutureless technology improve clinical outcomes?. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 98 (5) 1585-1592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Dogliotti AM, Guglielmini G, Margaglia F, Dellepiane M. Technique of insertion of Dogliotti-Guglielmini sutureless aortic valve prosthesis. Panminerva Med 1965; 7 (12) 470-476
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Eichstaedt HC, Easo J, Härle T, Dapunt OE. Early single-center experience in sutureless aortic valve implantation in 120 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 147 (1) 370-375
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Martens S, Sadowski J, Eckstein FS , et al. Clinical experience with the ATS 3f Enable® Sutureless Bioprosthesis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011; 40 (3) 749-755
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Englberger L, Carrel TP, Doss M , et al. Clinical performance of a sutureless aortic bioprosthesis: five-year results of the 3f Enable long-term follow-up study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 148 (4) 1681-1687
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Permanyer E, Estigarribia AJ, Ysasi A, Herrero E, Semper O, Llorens R. The 3f Enable sutureless bioprosthesis: Early results, safeguards, and pitfalls. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015; 149 (6) 1578-1583
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Schlömicher M, Haldenwang PL, Moustafine V, Bechtel M, Strauch JT. Minimal access rapid deployment aortic valve replacement: initial single-center experience and 12-month outcomes. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015; 149 (2) 434-440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kocher AA, Laufer G, Haverich A , et al. One-year outcomes of the Surgical Treatment of Aortic Stenosis With a Next Generation Surgical Aortic Valve (TRITON) trial: a prospective multicenter study of rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement with the EDWARDS INTUITY Valve System. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2013; 145 (1) 110-115 , discussion 115–116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Haverich A, Wahlers TC, Borger MA , et al. Three-year hemodynamic performance, left ventricular mass regression, and prosthetic-patient mismatch after rapid deployment aortic valve replacement in 287 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 148 (6) 2854-2860
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Folliguet TA, Laborde F, Zannis K, Ghorayeb G, Haverich A, Shrestha M. Sutureless perceval aortic valve replacement: results of two European centers. Ann Thorac Surg 2012; 93 (5) 1483-1488
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Gilmanov D, Miceli A, Bevilacqua S , et al. Sutureless implantation of the perceval s aortic valve prosthesis through right anterior minithoracotomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2013; 96 (6) 2101-2108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Mazine A, Teoh K, Bouhout I , et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement: a Canadian multicentre study. Can J Cardiol 2015; 31 (1) 63-68
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Miceli A, Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S , et al. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with Perceval S sutureless valve: early outcomes and one-year survival from two European centers. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 148 (6) 2838-2843
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Rubino AS, Santarpino G, De Praetere H , et al. Early and intermediate outcome after aortic valve replacement with a sutureless bioprosthesis: Results of a multicenter study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 148 (3) 865-871 , discussion 871
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Shrestha M, Folliguet TA, Pfeiffer S , et al. Aortic valve replacement and concomitant procedures with the Perceval valve: results of European trials. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 98 (4) 1294-1300
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Aymard T, Kadner A, Walpoth N , et al. Clinical experience with the second-generation 3f Enable sutureless aortic valve prosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010; 140 (2) 313-316
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Breitenbach I, Wimmer-Greinecker G, Bockeria LA , et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement with the Trilogy Aortic Valve System: multicenter experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010; 140 (4) 878-884 , 884.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Concistrè G, Miceli A, Marchi F , et al. Short-term follow up with the 3f Enable aortic bioprosthesis: clinical and echocardiographic results. J Heart Valve Dis 2013; 22 (6) 817-823
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Concistrè G, Miceli A, Chiaramonti F , et al. Sutureless aortic valve implantation through an upper v-type ministernotomy: an innovative approach in high-risk patients. Innovations (Phila) 2013; 8 (1) 23-28
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Flameng W, Herregods MC, Hermans H , et al. Effect of sutureless implantation of the Perceval S aortic valve bioprosthesis on intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011; 142 (6) 1453-1457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Martens S, Ploss A, Sirat S, Miskovic A, Moritz A, Doss M. Sutureless aortic valve replacement with the 3f Enable aortic bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 2009; 87 (6) 1914-1917
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Martens S, Zierer A, Ploss A , et al. Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement via Partial Sternotomy. Innovations (Phila) 2010; 5 (1) 12-15
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Michelena HI, Michler RE, Enriquez-Sarano M, Schaff HV, Suri RM. Alternative for surgical management of calcific aortic valve stenosis: sutureless valve implants. J Card Surg 2014; 29 (4) 490-493
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Minh TH, Mazine A, Bouhout I , et al. Expanding the indication for sutureless aortic valve replacement to patients with mitral disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 148 (4) 1354-1359
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Sadowski J, Kapelak B, Pfitzner R, Bartuś K. Sutureless aortic valve bioprothesis ‘3F/ATS Enable’—4.5 years of a single-centre experience. Kardiol Pol 2009; 67 (8A): 956-963
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S, Concistrè G, Fischlein T. Perceval sutureless aortic valve prosthesis: easy, fast, and safe. Innovations (Phila) 2011; 6 (6) 378-381
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S, Concistrè G, Fischlein T. REDO aortic valve replacement: the sutureless approach. J Heart Valve Dis 2013; 22 (5) 615-620
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Shrestha M, Khaladj N, Bara C, Hoeffler K, Hagl C, Haverich A. A staged approach towards interventional aortic valve implantation with a sutureless valve: initial human implants. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 56 (7) 398-400
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Shrestha M, Folliguet T, Meuris B , et al. Sutureless Perceval S aortic valve replacement: a multicenter, prospective pilot trial. J Heart Valve Dis 2009; 18 (6) 698-702
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Shrestha M, Timm R, Höffler K , et al. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with self-anchoring Perceval valve. J Heart Valve Dis 2013; 22 (2) 230-235
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 van Boxtel AG, Houthuizen P, Hamad MA , et al. Postoperative conduction disorders after implantation of the self-expandable sutureless Perceval S bioprosthesis. J Heart Valve Dis 2014; 23 (3) 319-324
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Vola M, Campisi S, Anselmi A, Faure M, Fuzellier JF, Gerbay A. Video-assisted minithoracotomy approach: technical developments towards totally endoscopic sutureless aortic valve replacement. J Card Surg 2014; 29 (4) 494-496
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Wendt D, Thielmann M, Buck T , et al. First clinical experience and 1-year follow-up with the sutureless 3F-Enable aortic valve prosthesis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2008; 33 (4) 542-547
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Dalén M, Biancari F, Rubino AS , et al. Ministernotomy versus full sternotomy aortic valve replacement with a sutureless bioprosthesis: a multicenter study. Ann Thorac Surg 2015; 99 (2) 524-530
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S, Schmidt J, Concistrè G, Fischlein T. Sutureless aortic valve replacement: first-year single-center experience. Ann Thorac Surg 2012; 94 (2) 504-508 , discussion 508–509
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S, Concistrè G, Fischlein T. Perceval S aortic valve implantation in mini-invasive surgery: the simple sutureless solution. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2012; 15 (3) 357-360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S, Vogt F, Hinzmann M, Concistrè G, Fischlein T. Advanced age per se should not be an exclusion criterion for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. J Heart Valve Dis 2013; 22 (4) 455-459
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S, Pollari F, Concistrè G, Vogt F, Fischlein T. Left ventricular mass regression after sutureless implantation of the Perceval S aortic valve bioprosthesis: preliminary results. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2014; 18 (1) 38-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S, Sirch J, Vogt F, Concistrè G, Fischlein T. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with Perceval valves: first clinical experience. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 2014; 15 (3) 230-234
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Thourani VH, Suri RM, Gunter RL , et al. Contemporary real-world outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in 141,905 low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2015; 99 (1) 55-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Ranucci M, Frigiola A, Menicanti L, Castelvecchio S, de Vincentiis C, Pistuddi V. Aortic cross-clamp time, new prostheses, and outcome in aortic valve replacement. J Heart Valve Dis 2012; 21 (6) 732-739
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 D'Onofrio A, Messina A, Lorusso R , et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement as an alternative treatment for patients belonging to the “gray zone” between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and conventional surgery: a propensity-matched, multicenter analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012; 144 (5) 1010-1016
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S, Jessl J , et al. Sutureless replacement versus transcatheter valve implantation in aortic valve stenosis: a propensity-matched analysis of 2 strategies in high-risk patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 147 (2) 561-567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Biancari F, Barbanti M, Santarpino G , et al. Immediate outcome after sutureless versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Heart Vessels 2015; (e-pub ahead of print)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Concistrè G, Santarpino G, Pfeiffer S , et al. Two alternative sutureless strategies for aortic valve replacement: a two-center experience. Innovations (Phila) 2013; 8 (4) 253-257
    PubMedGoogle Scholar