Back to Search Start Over

Off-pump injectable versus on-pump conventional tissue valves for pulmonary valve replacement: the injectable valve implantation randomised trial (INVITE)

Authors :
Chris Rogers
Rachael Heys
Gianni Angelini
Massimo Caputo
Lucy Culliford
Serban Stoica
Andrew Parry
Mark Hamilton
Karen Sheehan
Rebecca Evans
Mark Turner
Barnaby Reeves
Terrie Walker-Smith
Nicola Viola
Kim Wright
Source :
BMJ Open, Vol 13, Iss 6 (2023)
Publication Year :
2023
Publisher :
BMJ Publishing Group, 2023.

Abstract

Objectives To assess the effectiveness of injectable tissue pulmonary valve compared with standard pulmonary valve in patients requiring pulmonary valve replacement surgery.Design A multicentre, single-blind, parallel two-group randomised controlled trial. Participants were blind to their allocation. Follow-up continued for 6 months. Randomised allocations were generated by a computer using block randomisation, stratified by centre.Setting Two National Health Service secondary care centres in the UK.Participants People aged 12–80 years requiring pulmonary valve replacement.Interventions Participants were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to injectable pulmonary valve replacement (IPVR) without cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or standard pulmonary valve replacement (SPVR) with CPB.Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary outcome was chest drainage volume over the first 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital clinical outcomes; valve and heart function 6 months postsurgery and health-related quality of life 6 weeks and 6 months postsurgery.Results Nineteen participants agreed to take part. Eleven were allocated to IPVR and eight to SPVR. The trial was stopped before the target sample size of 60 participants was reached due to challenges in recruitment. The primary analysis includes all randomised participants; there were no withdrawals. Chest drain volume 24 hours after surgery was on average 277.6 mL lower with IPVR (IPVR mean 340.0 mL; SPVR mean 633.8 mL; mean difference, −277.6; 95% CI, −484.0 to −71.2; p=0.005). There were no statistically significant differences in time to readiness for extubation (p=0.476), time to fitness for discharge (p=0.577) and time to first discharge from the intensive care unit (p=0.209). Six participants with IPVR required CPB. Safety profiles and quality of life scores were similar.Conclusions IPVR reduced chest drain volume despite >50% of participants requiring CPB. There was no evidence of any other benefit of IPVR.Trial registration number ISRCTN23538073.

Subjects

Subjects :
Medicine

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
20446055
Volume :
13
Issue :
6
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
BMJ Open
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.fb162b990b4e9db3a0b12093aa7c0b
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065192