Impact of mechanical and biological aortic valve replacement on coronary perfusion: a prospective, randomized study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Coronary perfusion is impaired in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). Aortic valve replacement (AVR) leads to improvement, but not complete restoration, of coronary flow. Previous studies have shown that postoperative coronary flow rate and coronary reserve in mechanical valves is dependent on valve design and orientation. The study aim was to investigate acute changes in coronary perfusion in patients undergoing mechanical or biological valve replacement in a prospective, randomized clinical study.

METHODS: Forty patients undergoing AVR for AS underwent MRI scanning to measure coronary flow preoperatively and at five days after surgery. Patients scheduled for mechanical AVR (n = 20) were randomized to a tilting disc (Medtronic Hall) or bileaflet (Medtronic ADVANTAGE) prosthesis; the biological-valve group (n = 20) received a stented (Medtronic Mosaic) or stentless (Medtronic Freestyle) valve. Valve sizes were comparable in all groups. Patients also underwent echocardiography both preoperatively and postoperatively to measure transvalvular pressure gradients. The rate-pressure product (RPP) was calculated as a marker of myocardial oxygen demand and cardiac workload.

RESULTS: The mean preoperative coronary flow rate was 90 +/- 32 ml/min, and this increased after AVR in all patients. The rise in the mechanical-valve groups was comparable for the two tested valves, whereas in the biological-valve groups a significantly higher increase for stentless valves was present (p < 0.05). Mean pressure gradients for the Hall and ADVANTAGE valves were equal; for biological valves, the Mosaic demonstrated a higher mean gradient (19 +/- 6 mmHg) than the Freestyle (10 +/- 4 mmHg) (p < 0.05). The RPP was lower for ADVANTAGE (mechanical group) and for Freestyle valves (biological group).

CONCLUSION: Coronary artery flow was increased following AVR in all valve groups. The rise was significantly more distinct for Medtronic Freestyle stentless valves compared to the three other valve substitutes. As the stentless design also demonstrated superior hemodynamics and a lower myocardial oxygen demand with lower pressure gradients and lower RPP, this may have a positive impact on the clinical long-term outcome of this valve.

Author(s): Farhad Bakhtiary MD, Nasreddin Abolmaali MD, Omer Dzemali MD, Thomas Wittlinger MD, Mirko Doss MD, Anton Moritz MD, Peter Kleine MD

in: J Heart Valve Dis. 2006 Jan;15(1):5-11; discussion 11

 

PMID: 16480006 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Valve opening and closing dynamics after different aortic valve-sparing operations.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Aortic valve resuspension for ascending aortic aneurysm repair is associated with removal of the sinus of Valsalva. This may cause changes in leaflet motion and thus impact on long-term durability. The opening and closing characteristics of the aortic valve leaflets after reimplantation were studied using a published technique and a modification to create a ‘neosinus’, and the results compared to those of an age-matched control group.

METHODS: Between September 1995 and March 2002, 25 patients underwent normal aortic root reconstruction (group A), while in a further 21 patients the modified neosinus technique was used (group B). In both groups, the native valve was preserved and suspended inside a tubular prosthesis, with reimplantation of the coronary arteries. Transthoracic and transesophageal studies of aortic valve dynamics were performed intraoperatively, before hospital discharge, and at one year after surgery in all patients; the data were compared with those from a separate group of 25 matched control individuals (group C).

RESULTS: The valve opening velocity was 61.3+/-20.1, 46.3+/-8 and 29.2+/-9.8 cm/s in groups A, B and C, respectively (group A versus B, p = 0.003; A versus C, p <0.0001; B versus C, p <0.0001). Closing velocity was increased to 57.5+/-23 and 43.8+/-7 cm/s in groups A and B, compared to 23.6+/-7 cm/s in group C (A versus B, p = 0.012; A versus C, p <0.0001; B versus C, p = 0.0002). In seven group A patients, the leaflets touched the prosthetic wall during systole. Slow systolic closing displacement (SCD) amounted to 7.3+/-6 % of maximal opening in group A and 12.6+/-5 % in group B (p = 0.05), compared to 21.1+/-8.3% in group C (group A versus group C, p <0.0001; B versus C, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION: Reimplantation of the natural aortic valve in a prosthetic graft causes abnormally high opening and closing speeds, with possibly increased stress. The study results showed lower valve opening and closure dynamics after the creation of a sinus bulge compared to the conventional reimplantation technique. However, mid-term clinical observations showed favorable valve competence for both types of repair. Further long-term follow up is necessary to prove whether more physiological leaflet dynamics lead to improved durability.

Author(s): Aybek T, Sotiriou M, Wohleke T, Miskovic A, Simon A, Doss M, Dogan S, Wimmer-Greinecker G, Moritz A.

in: J Heart Valve Dis. 2005 Jan;14(1):114-20.

PMID: 15700445 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Minimally invasive versus conventional aortic valve replacement: a prospective randomized trail

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: A prospective randomized study was performed to compare conventional with minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR).

METHODS: Forty consecutive patients scheduled for elective aortic valve surgery were prospectively randomized either to the conventional group (group A, complete median sternotomy) or minimally invasive group (group B, partial upper sternotomy). Intraoperative and postoperative clinical data, and markers of myocardial and cerebral protection were determined. Neuropsychological tests were carried out to quantify psychological disorders.

RESULTS: Operative time and cardiopulmonary bypass time were slightly longer in group B, but not significantly so. No significant inter-group differences were found for postoperative pain scores and respiratory function. Chest tube drainage was significantly less in group B (495 +/- 165 versus 240 +/- 69 ml, p = 0.008). Creatine kinase (CK), CK-MB and troponin T levels were similar in both groups. Neither S-100B protein nor neuron-specific enolase levels differed significantly between groups at all sampling times. There were no strokes in the entire cohort. None of the neuropsychological tests yielded significant inter-group differences between conventional and minimally invasive surgery. C

CONCLUSION: The safety and reliability of AVR via a partial upper sternotomy is reported. Minimally invasive AVR can be performed with only slightly longer operative times, good cosmetic results and significantly less blood loss. A limited surgical access affected neither the patients’ neurological outcome nor the efficacy of myocardial protection.

Author(s): Dogan S, Dzemali O, Wimmer-Greinecker G, Derra P, Doss M, Khan MF, Aybek T, Kleine P, Moritz A.

in: J Heart Valve Dis. 2003 Jan;12(1):76-80.