Back to Search
Start Over
Comparison of Self-Expanding RDV Perceval S versus TAVI ACURATE neo/TF.
- Source :
-
The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon [Thorac Cardiovasc Surg] 2021 Aug; Vol. 69 (5), pp. 420-427. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Mar 24. - Publication Year :
- 2021
-
Abstract
- Background: Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (RDAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have emerged as increasingly used alternatives to conventional aortic valve replacement to treat patients at higher surgical risk. Therefore, in this single-center study, we retrospectively compared clinical outcomes and hemodynamic performance of two self-expanding biological prostheses, the sutureless and rapid deployment valve (RDV) Perceval-S (PER) and the transcatheter heart valve (THV) ACURATE neo /TF (NEO) in a 1:1 propensity-score-matching (PSM) patient cohort.<br />Methods: A total of 332 consecutive patients with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis underwent either singular RDAVR with PER (119) or TAVI with NEO (213) at our institutions between 2012 and 2017. To compare the unequal patient groups, a 1:1 PSM for preoperative data and comorbidities was conducted. Afterward, 59 patient pairs were compared with regard to relevant hemodynamic parameter, relevant paravalvular leak (PVL), permanent postoperative pacemaker (PPM) implantation rate, and clinical postoperative outcomes.<br />Results: Postoperative clinical short-term outcomes presented with slightly higher rates for 30-day all-cause mortality (PER = 5.1% vs. NEO = 1.7%, p = 0.619) and major adverse cardiocerebral event in PER due to cerebrovascular events (transient ischemic attack [TIA]-PER = 3.4% vs. TIA-NEO = 1.7%, p = 0.496 and Stroke-PER = 1.7% vs. Stroke-NEO = 0.0%, p = 1). Moreover, we show comparable PPM rates (PER = 10.2% vs. NEO = 8.5%, p = 0.752). However, higher numbers of PVL (mild-PER = 0.0% vs. NEO = 55.9%, p = 0.001; moderate or higher-PER = 0.0% vs. NEO = 6.8%, p = 0.119) after TAVI with NEO were observed.<br />Conclusion: Both self-expanding bioprostheses, the RDV-PER and THV-NEO provide a feasible option in elderly and patients with elevated perioperative risk. However, the discussed PER collective showed more postoperative short-term complications with regard to 30-day all-cause mortality and cerebrovascular events, whereas the NEO showed higher rates of PVL.<br />Competing Interests: None declared.<br /> (Thieme. All rights reserved.)
- Subjects :
- Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Valve diagnostic imaging
Aortic Valve physiopathology
Aortic Valve Stenosis diagnostic imaging
Aortic Valve Stenosis mortality
Aortic Valve Stenosis physiopathology
Female
Germany
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation adverse effects
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation mortality
Hemodynamics
Humans
Male
Postoperative Complications etiology
Prosthesis Design
Recovery of Function
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Aortic Valve surgery
Aortic Valve Stenosis surgery
Heart Valve Prosthesis
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation instrumentation
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1439-1902
- Volume :
- 69
- Issue :
- 5
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 33761569
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1722692