Stentless valves for aortic valve replacement: Where do we stand?

Current Opinion in Cardiology

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 96-103

  De Kerchove, Laurent ^a   Glineur, David ^a   El Khoury, Gebrine ^a   Noirhomme, Philippe ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN   (Belgium)

^b CLINIQUES UNIVERSITAIRES SAINT LUC   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Aortic stenosis; Aortic valve; Stentless valve; Surgery; Valve replacement

Indexed keywords

AORTA VALVE PROSTHESIS; AORTA VALVE REPLACEMENT; ENDOPROSTHESIS; HEART HEMODYNAMICS; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; STENTLESS AORTA VALVE PROSTHESIS; SURGICAL RISK; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SURVIVAL; XENOGRAFT;

AORTIC VALVE; DURABLE MEDICAL EQUIPMENT; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEART VALVE DISEASES; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; HUMANS; HYPERTROPHY, LEFT VENTRICULAR; RISK ASSESSMENT; STENTS; STROKE VOLUME; VENTRICULAR FUNCTION, LEFT;

EID: 33846894285     PISSN: 02684705     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/HCO.0b013e328014670a     Document Type: Review

References (68)

1. Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, et al. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N Engl J Med 1990; 322:1561-1566.
2. Ghali JK, Liao Y, Simmons B, et al. The prognostic role of left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with or without coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117:831-836.
3. Del Rizzo DF, Goldman BS, Christakis GT, et al. Hemodynamic benefits of the Toronto Stentless Valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 112:1431-1445.
4. Jin XY, Zhang ZM, Gibson DG, et al. Effects of valve substitute on changes in left ventricular function and hypertrophy after aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 1996; 62:683-690.
5. Maselli D, Pizio R, Bruno LP, et al. Left ventricular mass reduction after aortic valve replacement: homografts, stentless and stented valves. Ann Thorac Surg 1999; 67:966-971.
6. Walther T, Lehmann S, Falk V, et al. Prospectively randomized evaluation of stented xenograft hemodynamic function in the aortic position. Circulation 2004; 110 (11 Suppl 1):II74-II78.
7. Dellgren G, David TE, Raanani E, et al. Late hemodynamic and clinical outcomes of aortic valve replacement with the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount pericardial bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002; 124:146-154.
8. Doty DB, Cafferty A, Kon ND, et al. Medtronic Freestyle aortic root bioprosthesis: Implant techniques. J Card Surg 1998; 13:369-375.
9. Walther T, Falk V, Langebartels G, et al. Prospectively randomized evaluation of stentless vs. conventional biological aortic valves: impact on early regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. Circulation 1999; 100 (19 Suppl):II6-II10.
10. Perez de Arenaza D, Lees B, Flather M, et al., ASSERT (Aortic Stentless vs. Stented valve assessed by Echocardiography Randomized Trial) Investigators. Randomized comparison of stentless vs. stented valves for aortic stenosis: effects on left ventricular mass. Circulation 2005; 112:2696-2702. This study is one of the most recent and most powered randomized trials comparing porcine stentless valve with porcine stented valve. Investigators have used both echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance to evaluate LVM regression in each group.
11. Chambers JB, Rimington HM, Hodson F, et al. The subcoronary Toronto stentless vs. supra-annular Perimount stented replacement aortic valve: early clinical and hemodynamic results of a randomized comparison in 160 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006; 131:878-882. This study is one of the most recent and most powered randomized trials comparing the porcine stentless valve with the pericardial stented valve. Only echocardiography was used to evaluate LVM regression in each group.
12. David TE, Feindel CM, Bos J, et al. Aortic valve replacement with a stentless porcine aortic valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1994; 58:1030-1036.
13. Cohen G, Christakis GT, Joyner CD, et al. Are stentless valves hemodynamically superior to stented valves? A prospective randomized trial. Ann Thorac Surg 2002; 73:767-775.
14. Rao V, Christakis GT, Sever J, et al. A novel comparison of stentless versus stented valves in the small aortic root. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 117:431-436; discussion 436-438.
15. Raja SG, Macarthur KJ, Pollock JC. Impact of stentless aortic valves on left ventricular function and hypertrophy: current best available evidence. J Card Surg 2006; 21:313-319. In this review, investigators have exhaustively compiled all randomized trials comparing stentless vs. stented valves.
16. Santini F, Bertolini P, Montalbano G, et al. Hancock vs. stentless bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement in patients older than 75 years. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 66 (6 Suppl):S99-S103.
17. Williams RJ, Muir DF, Pathi V, et al. Randomized controlled trial of stented and stentless aortic bioprostheses: hemodynamic performance at 3 years. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 11 (4 Suppl 1):93-97.
18. Jasinski MJ, Hayton J, Kadziola Z, et al. Hemodynamic performance after stented vs stentless aortic valve replacement. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2002; 43:313-317.
19. Doss M, Martens S, Wood JP, et al. Performance of stentless vs. stented aortic valve bioprostheses in the elderly patient: a prospective randomized trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2003; 23:299-304.
20. Jasinski MJ, Ulbrych P, Kolowca M, et al. Early regional assessment of LV mass regression and function after stentless valve replacement: comparative randomized study. Heart Surg Forum 2004; 7:E462-E465.
21. Ali A, Halstead JC, Cafferty F, et al. Are stentless valves superior to modern stented valves? A prospective randomized trial. Circulation 2006; 114 (1 Suppl):I535-I540. This study is one of the most recent and most powered randomized trials comparing the porcine stentless valve with the pericardial stented valve. Investigators have used both echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance to evaluate LVM regression in each group.
22. Borger MA, Carson SM, Ivanov J, et al. Stentless aortic valves are hemodynamically superior to stented valves during mid-term follow-up: a large retrospective study. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 80:2180-2185.
23. Bove T, Van Belleghem Y, Francois K, et al. Stentless and stented aortic valve replacement in elderly patients: factors affecting midterm clinical and hemodynamical outcome. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2006; 30:706-713. This paper outlines the different factors influencing LVM regression several years after AVR.
24. O'Brien MF. The Cryolife-O'Brien composite aortic stentless xenograft: surgical technique of implantation. Ann Thorac Surg 1995; 60 (2 Suppl): S410-S413.
25. Beholz S, Claus B, Dushe S, et al. Operative technique and early hemodynamic results with the Freedom Solo valve. J Heart Valve Dis 2006; 15:429-432; 16784084.
26. Gelsomino S, Morocutti G, Frassani R, et al. Usefulness of the Cryolife O'Brien stentless suprannular aortic valve to prevent prosthesis-patient mismatch in the small aortic root. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39:1845-1851.
27. Hvass U, Palatianos GM, Frassani R, et al. Multicenter study of stentless valve replacement in the small aortic root. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 117:267-272.
28. Luciani GB, Bertolini P, Vecchi B, et al. Midterm results after aortic valve replacement with freehand stentless xenografts: a comparison of three prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998; 115:1287-1296; discussion 1296-1297.
29. Gelsomino S, Frassani R, Porreca L, et al. Early and midterm results of model 300 CryoLife O'Brien stentless porcine aortic bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 2001; 71 (5 Suppl):S297-S301.
30. O'Brien MF, Gardner MA, Garlick B, et al. CryoLife-O'Brien stentless valve: 10-year results of 402 implants. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 79:757-766.
31. Yun KL, Sintek CF, Fletcher AD, et al. Aortic valve replacement with the freestyle stentless bioprosthesis: five-year experience. Circulation 1999; 100 (19 Suppl):II17-II23.
32. Dumesnil JG, LeBlanc MH, Cartier PC, et al. Hemodynamic features of the freestyle aortic bioprosthesis compared with stented bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 66 (6 Suppl):S130-S133.
33. Dossche K, Vanermen H, Daenen W, et al. Hemodynamic performance of the PRIMA Edwards stentless aortic xenograft: early results of a multicenter clinical trial. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 44:11-14.
34. Doty DB, Cafferty A, Cartier P, et al. Aortic valve replacement with Medtronic Freestyle bioprosthesis: 5-year results. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 11 (4 Suppl 1):35-41.
35. Dellgren G, David TE, Raanani E, et al. The Toronto SPV: hemodynamic data at 1 and 5 years' postimplantation. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 11 (4 Suppl 1):107-113.
36. Bach DS, Kon ND, Dumesnil JG, et al. Ten-year outcome after aortic valve replacement with the freestyle stentless bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 80:480-486.
37. Yun KL, Jamieson WR, Khonsari S, et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch: hemodynamic comparison of stented and stentless aortic valves. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 11 (4 Suppl 1):98-102.
38. Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG, Jobin J, et al. Hemodynamic and physical performance during maximal exercise in patients with an aortic bioprosthetic valve: comparison of stentless vs. stented bioprostheses. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 34:1609-1617.
39. Fries R, Wendler O, Schieffer H, et al. Comparative rest and exercise hemodynamics of 23-mm stentless vs. 23-mm stented aortic bioprostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 2000; 69:817-822.
40. Bleiziffer S, Eichinger WB, Wagner I, et al. The Toronto root stentless valve in the subcoronary position is hemodynamically superior to the mosaic stented completely supra-annular bioprosthesis. J Heart Valve Dis 2005; 14:814-821.
41. Chambers J, Rimington H, Rajani R, et al. Hemodynamic performance on exercise: comparison of a stentless and stented biological aortic valve replacement. J Heart Valve Dis 2004; 13:729-733.
42. Eichinger WB, Botzenhardt F, Keithahn A, et al. Exercise hemodynamics of bovine vs. porcine bioprostheses: a prospective randomized comparison of the mosaic and perimount aortic valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005; 129:1056-1063.
43. Botzenhardt F, Eichinger WB, Bleiziffer S, et al. Hemodynamic comparison of bioprostheses for complete supra-annular position in patients with small aortic annulus. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 45:2054-2060.
44. Jamieson WR, Janusz MT, MacNab J, et al. Hemodynamic comparison of second- and third-generation stented bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2001; 71 (5 Suppl):S282-S284; 13388205.
45. Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG, Cartier PC, et al. Patient-prosthesis mismatch can be predicted at the time of operation. Ann Thorac Surg 2001; 71 (5 Suppl):S265-S268.
46. Bach DS, Goldman B, Verrier E, et al., Toronto SPV Valve Study Group. Impact of small valve size on hemodynamics and left ventricular mass regression with the Toronto SPV stentless aortic bioprosthesis. J Heart Valve Dis 2002; 11:236-241.
47. Imanaka K, Kohmoto O, Nishimura S, et al. Impact of postoperative blood pressure control on regression of left ventricular mass following valve replacement for aortic stenosis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2005; 27:994-999.
48. Dellgren G, Eriksson MJ, Blange I, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme gene polymorphism influences degree of left ventricular hypertrophy and its regression in patients undergoing operation for aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol 1999; 84:909-913.
49. Lund O, Emmertsen K, Dorup I, et al. Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy during 10 years after valve replacement for aortic stenosis is related to the preoperative risk profile. Eur Heart J 2003; 24:1437-1446.
50. Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG, Leblanc MH, et al. Changes in left ventricular mass and function after aortic valve replacement: a comparison between stentless and stented bioprosthetic valves. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1999; 12:981-987.
51. Desai ND, Merin O, Cohen GN, et al. Long-term results of aortic valve replacement with the St Jude Toronto stentless porcine valve. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 78:2076-2083.
52. Poirer NC, Pelletier LC, Pellerin M, et al. 15-year experience with the Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 66 (6 Suppl):S57-S61.
53. Neville PH, Aupart MR, Diemont FF, et al. Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis in aortic or mitral position: a 12-year experience. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 66 (6 Suppl):S143-S147.
54. David TE, Armstrong S, Sun Z. The Hancock II bioprosthesis at 12 years. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 66 (6 Suppl):S95-S98.
55. Rahimtoola SH. Choice of prosthetic heart valve for adult patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41:893-904.
56. Grunkemeier GL, Li HH, Naftel DC, et al. Long-term performance of heart valve prostheses. Curr Probl Cardiol 2000; 25:73-154.
57. Dellgren G, Feindel CM, Bos J, et al. Aortic valve replacement with the Toronto SPV: long-term clinical and hemodynamic results. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2002; 21:698-702.
58. Bach DS, Goldman B, Verrier E, et al., Toronto SPV Valve Study Group. Durability and prevalence of aortic regurgitation nine years after aortic valve replacement with the Toronto SPV stentless bioprosthesis. J Heart Valve Dis 2004; 13:64-72.
59. Mohammadi S, Baillot R, Voisine P, et al. Structural deterioration of the Freestyle aortic valve: mode of presentation and mechanisms. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006; 132:401-406.
60. David TE, Ivanov J, Eriksson MJ, et al. Dilatation of sinotubular junction causes aortic insufficiency after aortic valve replacement with the Toronto SPV bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001; 122:929-934.
61. Jin XY, Westaby S. Aortic root geometry and stentless porcine valve competence. Semin Thorac Cardiovascul Surg 1999; 11 (suppl 1):145-150.
62. Bakhtiary F, Schiemann M, Dzemali O, et al. Stentless bioprostheses improve postoperative coronary flow more than stented prostheses after valve replacement for aortic stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006; 131:883-888.
63. David TE, Puschmann R, Ivanov J, et al. Aortic valve replacement with stentless and stented porcine valves: a case match study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998; 116:236-241.
64. Del Rizzo DF, Abdoh A, Cartier P, et al. The effect of prosthetic valve type on survival after aortic valve surgery. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 11 (Suppl 1):1-8.
65. Westaby S, Horton M, Jin XY, et al. Survival advantage of stentless aortic bioprostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 2000; 70:785-790.
66. Luciani GB, Casali G, Auriemma S, et al. Survival after stentless and stented xenograft aortic valve replacement: a concurrent, controlled trial. Ann Thorac Surg 2002; 74:1443-1449.
67. Dagenais F, Cartier P, Voisine P, et al. Which biologic valve should we select for the 45 to 65-year-old age group requiring aortic valve replacement? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005; 129:1041-1049.
68. Luciani GB, Santini F, Auriemma S, et al. Long-term results after aortic valve replacement with the Biocor PSB stentless xenograft in the elderly. Ann Thorac Surg 2001; 71 (5 Suppl):S306-S310.